County taxpayers on the hook for Animal Control

Thursday

Apr 17, 2014 at 9:32 AM

Jacob Misener

In the past decade, Livingston County Animal Control (LCAC) has cost taxpayers more money each year, while offering few noticeable increases in services or results, leaving many in the community to question both the leadership and the fiscal stability of the department moving forward.Based on data provided by Livingston County Board member Carolyn Gerwin, the total program cost has risen from $113,066 in 2004 to an all-time high of $138,326 in 2013 — averaging an increase of just over $2,500 annually. While this seems to be a modest increase given the fact prices for virtually everything has risen dramatically over the same time period, the burden to Livingston County taxpayers has continued to grow, despite changes made in 2008 that were supposed to provide more long-term solvency to the program.In 2008, the registration fee was increased by $3 per dog and instead of a three-year registration; pet owners were encouraged to register their animal annually. That same year, the burden to taxpayers fell from $65,654 to $32,968 — a decrease of nearly 50 percent.Following this move, the program quickly relapsed back into a state of dependency on taxpayer funds, taking up $80,000 in taxpayer funds last year — another all-time high for LCAC.Despite the budget increases and the higher burden to area taxpayers, the number of dogs registered increased by just 6 percent since 2006 and the number of stray dogs picked up has decreased by a staggering 75 percent. At Tuesday evening’s meeting on the matter, Gerwin offered several proposals for the program moving forward that could help address its financial woes.In recent years, the communication between animal control and the Livingston County Humane Society has become an issue at times, leading to increased tensions of late, something that became evident at Tuesday’s meeting. Co-founder of the humane society, Karen Gregory, who spoke at the meeting, said her organization’s only goal is to continue providing the best possible service to the animals of the county.“We just want to move forward with a positive outlook for the animals,” Gregory said. “I have learned that every day is a new day, nothing stays the same. All this is about, I hope, is change, and saving the taxpayers’ dollars.”Gerwin’s plan moving forward, which she told The Leader, appeared to be one of the only options left after current animal control administrator Susan Albright withdrew her bid for a new contract shortly after the committee approvied it by a 5-2 margin, demands better cooperation between the two groups moving forward.This proposal would unbundle services for the program, while paying the humane society $2,000 monthly for the use of extra kennel and office space at its facility. According to Gerwin, under this agreement, with the current level of staffing and salaries set to reflect the additional duties of a non-vet administrator, Livingston County could cut costs for the program by some $60,000 annually.“Some of the people did not realize that we were the ones who got approached,” Gregory said on Wednesday. “We didn’t do any of the approaching in this.”Albright said that there are around 8,000 dogs in the county, with just 3,600 registered last year. Of the 310 animal control matters that went through the court system last year, two individuals accounted for nearly half (150) of them, and just $3,000 in fines was collected –down from the average of $4,507 from the past ten years.With just over two weeks until Albright’s current contract draws to a close, the county now faces a program with serious financial challenges that has no administrator and no veterinarian come May 1, leaving many to wonder what the future of animal control may look like in the state’s fourth-largest county.Gerwin said she expected the measure would come up in discussion at Thursday’s Livingston County Board meeting. The meeting is scheduled for 6 p.m. at the Livingston County Courthouse.